My Idea for Reforming the Electoral College (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 28, 2024, 12:47:12 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Process (Moderator: muon2)
  My Idea for Reforming the Electoral College (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Do you support my plan for Electoral Reform?
#1
Yes
#2
No
#3
Undecided
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results


Author Topic: My Idea for Reforming the Electoral College  (Read 8390 times)
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,793


« on: December 04, 2010, 11:22:32 PM »

My concern with eliminating the EV completely or adopting this idea is that candidates will only focus on highly populated areas, and states such as Iowa and New Hampshire will be ignored.

Mass democracies with an electorate almost as large as the American one which use a PV system for the election of the President have not had this issue.

How many mass democracies use an FPTP system to elect their top leader? The answer is very few. Most use a parliamentary system to indirectly choose the prime minster of equivalent position. Those that directly elect their leader often use a runoff if no one gets a majority vote (eg. France).

Of course not, a vote is a vote, no matter where it's cast. I don't understand why EC supporters have convinced themselves of something that makes so little sense.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,793


« Reply #1 on: December 07, 2010, 09:43:57 PM »

My concern with eliminating the EV completely or adopting this idea is that candidates will only focus on highly populated areas, and states such as Iowa and New Hampshire will be ignored.

Mass democracies with an electorate almost as large as the American one which use a PV system for the election of the President have not had this issue.

Of course not, a vote is a vote, no matter where it's cast. I don't understand why EC supporters have convinced themselves of something that makes so little sense.

How many mass democracies use an FPTP system to elect their top leader? The answer is very few. Most use a parliamentary system to indirectly choose the prime minster of equivalent position. Those that directly elect their leader often use a runoff if no one gets a majority vote (eg. France).

Out of the ten largest countries in the world, Indonesia and Brazil use direct elections to choose their presidents and Nigeria and Russia use direct electoral-type events to choose theirs. Neither Indonesia nor Brazil have the problems suggested, although Hashemite could certainly tell you a good deal more about elections in Brazil than I can.

I was thinking of the many parliamentary democracies in Europe and Asia, and you are correct that many countries that emerged in the 20th century use a congressional system with a president. Even so, I think the core of my statement stands. Direct presidential election without protection against a minority plurality winner is rare.

In your list above, Russia, Brazil, and Indonesia all use a runoff if the president doesn't get 50% on the first round (I don't know if Nigeria uses a runoff or not in their current form of government). The US system is a pre-modern way to conduct a runoff - a hybrid based on the experience from Britain, the novelty of an elected head of state, and the lack of good communication in the 18th century to conduct a direct runoff. In the Constitution, Congress acts as the runoff if 50% of the electors are not won. Above all, the founders wanted to prevent a tyranny in the new country and the overlapping majority requirements were one way to accomplish that.

To my point. If US was to be properly modern in its election for president, then there should be a runoff provision if no candidate receives 50%. This could be with a second round of voting or with an IRV system. Any system without that type of basic protection would be sorely lacking, IMO.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,793


« Reply #2 on: December 07, 2010, 10:34:03 PM »

Muon, I agree wholeheartedly. When I say I support "populär vote" elections, I merely mean that the President should be directly elected by the people, and not by an electoral college.

IRV would be the best possible system.

My statement underlies my great objection to the NPVIC. In order to get around a constitutional amendment, the Compact cannot use any kind of runoff to select electors. Nor can it use an IRV in the states with a Compact, since it wouldn't be known in the other states which candidates would be left for a runoff.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 14 queries.